On 09/11/2015 12:48 PM, Matt Hall wrote: > > Yes, that did not work and left the first rpm in place. I think we did > something bad with the EVR and rpm was unable to find / remove the old > version. > > For instance, on the command line, I am able to do a > > “rpm -qi rpmone--” and get output, for the second > more correctly named rpm. > > if I do the same to the first rpmone, rpm cannot find it and says that > the package is not installed. Yet both packages show up in a ‘rpm -qa’ > or ‘rpm -qi rpmone’ (no version or release)
It's probably the - in the upstream version. I think that's a reserved character and it changes the n-v-r matching such that the names are no longer the same. > From: Jeffrey Johnson <n3...@mac.com <mailto:n3...@mac.com>> > Reply-To: "rpm-users@rpm5.org <mailto:rpm-users@rpm5.org>" > <rpm-users@rpm5.org <mailto:rpm-users@rpm5.org>> > Date: Thursday, September 10, 2015 at 4:11 PM > To: "rpm-users@rpm5.org <mailto:rpm-users@rpm5.org>" <rpm-users@rpm5.org > <mailto:rpm-users@rpm5.org>> > Subject: Re: rpm did not remove previous version > > Did you type "rpm -Uvh ..." > or "rpm -ivh ..."? > > In almost all circumstances (kernels being the major exception), "rpm > -Uvh ... " should be used. > > hth > > 73 de Jeff > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Sep 10, 2015, at 5:35 PM, Matt Hall <mh...@tivo.com > <mailto:mh...@tivo.com>> wrote: > >> >> We had a bit of a mis-naming snafu that we’re trying to sort out how >> to fix. >> >> First rpm was >> >> Name: rpmone >> Version: 1.1.branchname-352 >> Release: 1 >> >> We later fixed the versioning, because it caused issues / was not >> upgrading when a new version was installed. >> >> Second rpm was >> >> Name: rpmone >> Version: 1.2.branchname >> Release: 381 >> >> The second one increments the Release field at build time. The first >> one was incrememting the Version field. >> >> When we install the second one, it installs, but does not remove the >> first one. >> So now we’re left with systems that have two rpms of the same name, >> but different version/releases. >> >> Is there anything we can do in the creation/install of the 1.2 rpm to >> clear out or remove any 1.1? We tried Obsoletes, >> but that seems to be mainly for rpm name changes, not this >> version/release issue we have. >> >> These were built/installed on CentOS 5.8, with rpm version 4.4.2.3 >> >> Any pointers or docs to look at would be helpful or google keywords to >> search on, >> >> Thanks, >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> This email and any attachments may contain confidential and privileged >> material for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, >> copying, or distribution of this email (or any attachments) by others >> is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact >> the sender immediately and permanently delete this email and any >> attachments. No employee or agent of TiVo Inc. is authorized to >> conclude any binding agreement on behalf of TiVo Inc. by email. >> Binding agreements with TiVo Inc. may only be made by a signed written >> agreement. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > This email and any attachments may contain confidential and privileged > material for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, > copying, or distribution of this email (or any attachments) by others is > prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the > sender immediately and permanently delete this email and any > attachments. No employee or agent of TiVo Inc. is authorized to conclude > any binding agreement on behalf of TiVo Inc. by email. Binding > agreements with TiVo Inc. may only be made by a signed written agreement. -- Doug Ledford <dledf...@redhat.com> GPG KeyID: 0E572FDD
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
